• dan1101@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    26 days ago

    There are too many games of this sort. Nobody wants to play them because you have to devote your life to grinding and getting good if you want to be play well.

    We need some new ideas and you don’t need to bet the company on every game. Instead of pouring millions of dollars into a clone of existing games, develop several smaller more innovative games and see which ones succeed. For every Concord there is a Stardew Valley, Vampire Survivors, or Among Us.

  • tuckerm@supermeter.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    26 days ago

    I was watching a livestream of this game’s reveal trailer. The chat was excited at first during the cinematic trailer. Sure, it looked like a Malt-O-Meal Guardians of the Galaxy, but it still looked like it could be fun. Then as soon as they said “5 v 5 live service game” there was a giant, collective “oh nevermind lol” from the chat.

  • Ledivin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    26 days ago

    What’s Concord? I’ve literally never heard of this before

    Spoiler: if you don’t advertise at all, people won’t play your game

    • sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      26 days ago

      Its an enormously overproduced Overwatch clone with zany characters that seem to be going for Guardians of the Galaxy, an art style that is basically just bizarre, and gameplay from a decade ago.

      Sony wanted their own Overwatch, after seeing its success, then spent a huge amount of time and money developing it, and this is what they came up with.

      Oh, right, it isn’t free to play, costs 40 bucks, and then also has an astounding amount of microtransactions.

      EDIT: Based off of current active player count, Concord has cost approximately $200,000 dollars per active player to produce.

      Better hope they are all omega class hyper whale spenders, I guess.

  • doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 days ago

    PlayStation what? Did they announce this thing at the last state of play?

    I always watch those, but I’m pretty sure I’ve never heard of this…

  • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    25 days ago

    I never heard of it and searching for it on Steam doesn’t give any results so I’m guessing it’s not even available here.

  • Jackthelad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    26 days ago

    I’ve been playing on PS5, getting games quickly and having a lot of fun with it.

    If it doesn’t last long, I’ll still get my £35 worth.

  • kugmo@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    25 days ago

    Sony’s executives thought it was a great idea to buy this studio when they first saw the game as it was reported last year. I don’t know if the character designs were mandated to be this way because Sony executives demanded it, or if the devs designed them the way they are. Did they want to chase the blue hair vocal minority on xitter that complain about games not being diverse enough, then don’t buy the games with these incredibly diverse, brave and quirky character designs anyway? On top of that a $40 price tag is enough to make a dead on arrival game among other issues like a forced PSN account and no Steam Deck support.

    • Monomate@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      26 days ago

      I just don’t understand the insistence on targeting the woke demographic instead of core gamers. They’ve repeatedly shown that they are masters in the complaining department, but when it comes to buying diversity-infused games, they are a no-show.

        • A7thStone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          25 days ago

          It’s really hard to refute willful stupidity. You can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into.